Religious Studies 38 (1):1-25 (2002)

Authors
T. J. Mawson
Oxford University
Abstract
In this paper, I argue that classical theists should think of God as having created morality. In form, my position largely resembles that defended by Richard Swinburne. However, it differs from his position in content in that it evacuates the category of necessary moral truth of all substance and, having effected this tactical withdrawal, Swinburne's battle lines need to be redrawn. In the first section, I introduce the Euthyphro dilemma. In the second, I argue that if necessary moral truths are seen as analytically/logically so, then, pace Swinburne, they cannot be regarded as substantive principles. Thus, seeing necessary moral truths as analytically/logically necessary and independent of God does not threaten God's power or sovereignty and leaves open the possibility that all value is contingent upon His will. In the third section, I turn to consider how the claim that all value is contingent upon God's will might best be understood, arguing that classical theists will want to commit themselves to a relatively strong form of objectivism about moral value (even though this is not needed in order to solve the Euthyphro dilemma). I then give and defend an account of God's creation of contingent moral truths which coheres with what I argue is the most plausible form of this commitment. In the following section, I argue that this account avoids the charge that God is arbitrary in His choice of values and, finally, I argue that it avoids the charge that God may not be said to be good without vacuity. Thus, I conclude that the Euthyphro dilemma does not threaten classical theism.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s003441250100587x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,160
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Divine Freedom and Free Will Defenses.W. Paul Franks - 2015 - Heythrop Journal 56 (1):108-119.
Morality and Religion.Tim Mawson - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):1033-1043.
Swinburne on the Euthyphro Dilemma. Can Supervenience Save Him?Simin Rahimi - 2008 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 13 (1):17-29.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Morality and God.Richard Swinburne - 2003 - Revue Internationale de Philosophie 57 (225):315 - 328.
God and Moral Realism.Katherin Rogers - 2005 - International Philosophical Quarterly 45 (1):103-118.
Divine Command Theory and Theistic Activism.Simin Rahimi - 2012 - Heythrop Journal 53 (4):551-559.
Death and God: The Case of Richard Swinburne.Victor Cosculluela - 1997 - Religious Studies 33 (3):293-302.
Morality and Religion.Tim Mawson - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):1033-1043.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
132 ( #87,419 of 2,499,425 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,166 of 2,499,425 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes